Why the Mil Mi-24 has no Western Counterpart

The AH-1 and AH-64 have both proven for decades to be significantly better gunships.

It was a mediocre gunship and a worse troop carrier. No amount of brain damaged mental gymnastics on your part changes that.

The Hind being used as a gunship can't be used as a troop carrier, especially somewhere like Afghanistan

That must be why Russia is trying to replace them with Mi-28s.

You get rid of the props, give them wings, add jet engines

Probably cause the profit margins on such a thing wouldn't be big enough for any of the top defense businesses.

>no money in it
>fuck that

idk I like the idea of attack helicopters but desu it would be kind of cringe to pilot one

>Soviets lost about 100 Hinds

The US lost 25 helicopters in Afghanistan.

Because russia is poor, and it's cheaper to build one type that can do a lot of stuff OK than different types that can do their intended roles well.

A idea that in practice ends up with a chopper doing two jobs poorly instead of one well. Which is why both the US and Soviets preferred dedicated troop carrying helis supported by dedicated gunships in their respective wars. Hinds are shit troop carriers and having gunships drop down to deploy troops where they cannot use much other than door guns to suppress the enemy doesn't work.